Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
wallos-mcp

wallos-mcp

by LovelessCodes
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Get the cost of a month

get_monthly_cost
Read-only

Calculates a calendar month's total subscription spend in the main currency, defaulting to the current month.

Instructions

Total spend for a calendar month, converted into the main currency, as Wallos computes it on the dashboard. Defaults to the current month.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_monthly_cost"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
yearNoFour digit year. Defaults to the current year.
monthNoMonth number 1-12. Defaults to the current month.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), so the description's job is added context, and it delivers: the value is currency-converted and matches Wallos' own dashboard aggregation. It does not state whether inactive/cancelled subscriptions or paused items are included, which would be the remaining behavioral gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single tight sentence that front-loads what is returned and what it means, with the default behavior last. Zero waste.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema exists, and the description does convey the return shape (one total-spend figure in the main currency). Minor omissions are the scope of subscriptions aggregated and whether the response is a bare number or includes a currency label.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% with only two optional integer params (year bounds 2000-2100, month 1-12), so the schema does the heavy lifting. 'Defaults to the current month' in the description merely restates the schema and adds no new semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource (total spend for a calendar month) and adds the crucial qualifier that the figure is the dashboard-equivalent computation in the main currency. Distinct from siblings such as get_period_budget or list_subscriptions, though it never names them.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative named. An agent must infer from the name and the 'as on the dashboard' clause whether this or get_period_budget is the right call for a given cost question.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools